• fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      recently fixed

      No, not really. Generally as a product ages the quality control goes down since demand isn’t there. You can make archival grade CDs that will last a life time, it just costs too much money for anyone to want to pay for it. Plus business have tape which is plenty good for long term storage.

      • s0ckpuppet@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        I wonder if in the context of storing 200 TB whether the added cost now makes sense given what a comparable SSD or HDD equivalent would run.

        • fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          SSDs aren’t great for long term archival since the nand needs to periodically be refreshed. You can build a better SSD, but that compromises storage capacity. HDDs are better, but they have other issues from sitting around not being used. Disks like these are a pretty good backup method if produced correctly. If is the big key, 100 layers sounds like a lot of layers to manufacture correctly, and you won’t know your dat is gone until it’s unreadable.

          But will it be able to replace tape for long term backup? LTO 9 is supposedly available, and up to 18TB not compressed. LTO-10 is 36, and supposedly LTO-14 is going to be 576 TB but that seems overly ambitious.

          • wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            Also LTO is rather expensive, way out of range for the home archivist. Discs tend to be much cheaper! Hopefully this is the case for these as well.